By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - My Theory on why COD may always be popular

oniyide on 18 October 2010

I can see how COD appeals to people anyone can pick up a controller and feel like a bad ass, and anyone who says its realistic is full of crap, this is coming from a guy who did 5 yrs in the Marines there is nothing realistic about COD. Killzone 2 is more realistic. The multi is fun in a mindless sort of way kind of like Mvs.C2, sure they are both broken but that doesnt mean you cant have fun, the problem is people dont play anything else.  Try playing Killzone 2, now that is a game that will hand you your ass and requires skill, I dont even play anymore.  It can be addicting,just the other day I had to peel myself away from the game I was on a hot streak. but ultimately the crappy single player stuff turned me off to the game, id rather play Bioshock 2 honestly



Around the Network
Griffin on 18 October 2010

MW2 is a broken game.  But when the rest of the market is even worse its kinda hard to move onto other games, only better shooter on the market is CoD4 and thats not saying much.  CoD is also known for having some of the worse lag in any shooter game and people still go back and play it no matter how many times they get killed due to lag, cross map explosives, corner camper with an AA12 and claymores, or some guy running and lagging around the map and getting knife kills form 30feet away.



elvacano80 on 18 October 2010

I have to agree MW2 is a big pile of s**t



 

 

Fame_Mcswagg on 18 October 2010

My theory on why so many play MW2. Because its fun.



I'm not martin luther king. I don't have a dream. I have a plan

Sell a man a fish you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish you just ruined a perfect business opportunity.

We didn't emerge out of the stone age because we ran out of stones. Its time to be proactive not reactive.

Feylic on 18 October 2010

Maybe it's popular because it's good, and people enjoy playing it, hmm? just a thought.



Around the Network
fighter on 18 October 2010
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

Hey, I agree with you, the story is stupid. The point is it's still better than 90 % of realistic shooters out there. Wake your brain up and remember : reviews are comparison guides, not absolute judgements that would transcend time and space. 

comparisons........ you serious?

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

Snap out of it. Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Counter-Strike, etc. are labelled realistic as opposed to Halo / Haze / Killzone / Doom / Quake / Unreal Tournament / Tribes etc.

yeah realistic to people who are stupid....... lol modern maybe what your looking for...

you poor thing, your parents must have swinged you too close to the walls...

Again, you have the point of view of a fanatic thinking in absolutes when it's about re-la-ti-vi-ty. Have you tried punching yourself ? That's a realistic game right there.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

since facts insult you - allow me to add these :

- VgChartz is about sales

- Counter Strike (2000) : 4.2M

- Counter Strike Condition Zero (2004) : 2.9M

- Counter Strike Source (2006) : 2.1M

- Lol

- Call of Duty 4 : 13M

- Call of Duty 5 : 11M

- Call of Duty 6 : 20M

lol again you misunderstand which isn't hard believe, if COD didn't exist FPS would still be here and was recognize long before cod 4 came around you have to be a *nevermind* 

don't try to switch criterias. It has never been about launching a genre. Nice try though, as by this criteria you would be again contradicting yourself, FPS having been recognized years before any of the examples you cited.

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

- and now you're saying COD franchise is pioneering the genre

yeah for idiots, re read dude

no no no, you're saying the majority of fps gamers are uneducated idiots and that is why COD is pionnering the fps genre in general

If you meant to write something else feel free to elaborate and contradict yourself again

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

- you seem more than a true fps fan, "caricatural archetype" would fit you better.

and you fit the people who suck at every shooter not COD amirite? and you use sales as an indication of quality.....for shame

I'm actually really bad at FPSs except Unreal Tournament and Quake 3.

And regarding sales being an indication of quality, there is indeed a correlation. I'm surprised you were unaware of it. As stupid as you might seem to be you should know what indication in this case means, right?







Mr Khan on 18 October 2010
theprof00 said:

These are the reasons:
Heavily reward based. Gamers are like pigeons. Give them a reward for hitting a button and they'll do it over and over and over.

Massive multiplayer foundation plus very good matchmaking. It's rarre that you have to wait in a lobby. About 90-95% of being in the game is actually playing.

Everyone and their mom owns it. Play with your friends. Simple enough.

You basically have it. Modern Warfare 2 conquers over supposedly "better" games just like how Mario Kart conquers "superior" racing titles. They've got it down to the brass tacks of what is most appealing about gaming.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Wagram on 18 October 2010
evolution_1ne said:


OMG is your sig Gran Turismo 5? WTF that is CRAZY.



PureDante on 18 October 2010
evolution_1ne said:
PureDante said:
evolution_1ne said:
fighter said:

Your theory is flawed at several levels :

 

If the game below average why does it get top critics and popularity ?

The fact "everyone" has it does create inertia for both the title itself and the franchise, but it doesn't explain how it got there.

There weren't many realistic & successful shooters before COD, and since COD4 the genre has become THE genre. How do you explain a below average game would develop a genre almost by itself ?


critics are fucking stupid, MW2 story made no fucking sense what so ever and was damn short, and the multiplayer is so fun/popular/and addictive because it's an effortless, skill less, meaningless, empty, hollow experience masked by challenges and tons of unnecessary bullshit to unlock, that even the most brain dead of gamers can be good at and feel a sense of accomplishment, why do you think every thing was put on a 10x multiplier for MW2... answer: brain dead gamers see 100 and go O_O oooo big numbers. COD multiplayer is literally fps for dummies, so now the casuals can say look I'm good, 

ok first fail is saying COD is realistic........ this is your first generation of gaming and you ARE an xbox owner for sure, ARMA is realistic, COD isn't even realistic in practice, even the mechanics(zero recoil, perks, teleporting knives) are casual, ohhh 2 bullet kills, yeah not meant for realism, it's meant because because noobs would suck if they actually had to lead their targets and hold a firing position.

second fail is saying cod 4 established the fps genre, are you joking, established it for who??? stupid new wave gamers who suck shit at shooters, and don't know a damn thing about them and honestly think cod 4 established the genre??? is so then I'm inclined to agree, but for someone who's been here since unreal and quake, and the realistic shooters of battlefield (not bad company) and counter strike, that's just f**king insult.

call of duty is below below average shooter, and a game that only noob to the genre and or people who have never ever ever ever ever played an fps before in their lives would find good, and this includes COD 4, but to it's credit, at least the story made sense.  and that's why it's so popular,  battlefield, and counterstrike and many other fps games weren't stupid enough to cultivate the massive idiot market the COD franchise is pioneering today.

 

edit: and to be completely honest, they have them, because as a true fps fan, we know there is no worse player than a Call of Duty fan playing ANY FPS NOT call of duty.

kfine, I understand what you're saying. But, mainstream&hardcore in mind, isn't the point of all video games to chill out after your daily chores, with friends or not, to have a fun experience and, regardless of your efforts in playing time, have a rural minded point of dedication towards an end-game goal? CoD does this, as MMOs do this. Prestige 10 Level 70, (pointless IMO), provide hours upon hours of gameplay, and give you a reason to not have a need to purchase more games (for the mainstream&hardcore who only buy 1-2 games a year). Isn't that what both parties want? A fully packaged game? With goals (yeah I know its bs that its the same goals every set of prestige)? That has expansions (DLC)? Fuck critics, but its hard to lower the review scores of the game if you look at it from this view point.

CoD4 certainly did not establish the fps genre, it established the next gen bar-minimum of entertainment. Achievements (goals/barracks), rewards (new weapons), and rankings to show whose the better player (or just been playing longer). So, its a pretty important landmark of a game (not to mention an insane refresh from cod3 to cod4).

Then again, whats a balanced shooter, in your opinion? 
Edit: derp, sorry I had to reply to you cause your sig had me drooling. haha

grinding in MMO's is actually helpful and make you better at the game

prestige in COD is like those Tee-shirts that say "how to keep an idiot busy read the back of this shirt" and on the other side it says "how to keep a idiot busy read the front of this shirt"

So grinding in the past 3 cod games online doesnt get you "better" guns and perks? S'all the same shit. 

And about prestige, I agree. 



All of this, of course, is just my opinion.

Skyrim 100%'d. Dark Souls 100%'d. 
Dark Souls > Skyrim.
Halo 4 is the best damn FPS since Halo 3.
Proud pre-orderer of 2 PS4's and an Xbox One. 

Currently Playing: Dark Souls II, South Park
Playstation 4: MGS V GZ, Killzone: Shadow Fall, NBA 2k14.

Chairman-Mao on 18 October 2010

I disagree actually, but I respect your points.

Black Ops is going to be fucking huge, no way around that.

But lets look into the future. Infinity Ward is a ghost town full of scabs (replacements), I honestly don't expect Modern Warfare 3 to be a great game which will be a big blow to the Call of Duty series. Then after MW3 (which I expect to suck with the combination of how bad MW2 was and the situation at IW) we will probably have a COD game created by Sledgehammer games which will most likely suck and be a lousy spinoff type game; another blow to the Call of Duty series.

Then we also have to look at competition. There's going to be a Bad Company 3 which isn't a threat to take Call of Duty's crown as king of the FPS but will take some sales away from Call of Duty. Then there'll be a Medal of Honor 2 eventually too which won't do much but is another option for people. And here's the game I think could actually take the crown from Call of Duty; Respawn Entertainment's (aka Infinity Ward 2) future project which EA will probably hype like there's no tomorrow. Oh and we can't forget about Bungie's next game which will probably be a FPS, although Activision probably won't be stupid enough to pit Bungie's new game against Call of Duty.

That's just my take on things. Basically to sum it up in a sentence: Increased competition in the FPS market especially from Respawn Entertainment, deterioring quality in the CoD series since CoD4 and oversaturation of CoD games thanks to Treyarch, Sledgehammer and what's left of IW all working on CoD games will be the death of Call of Duty.

 

ALTERNATE WAY COD WILL BE KILLED:

Bobby Kotick will decide to put a subscription on Call of Duty for $15 a month which kill Call of Duty very fast and people will go play Respawn Entertainmen's new game.